I think one of the major reasons tech geeks are mislead by this "productivity" culture is because we make the flawed assumption that our brains work similarly t

I think one of the major reasons tech geeks are mislead by this "productivity" culture is because we make the flawed assumption that our brains work similarly to (silicon) computers in the sense that our performance and output is consistent and independent of tasks performed previously. If we can perform Action X in 2 days, then we should be able to perform 100x Action X in 200 days. The reality, which I learned the hard way, is that you just can't extrapolate like that. Performing Action X could create a massive spike in cortisol that quite literally drives you (partially) insane in a matter of weeks and renders you nearly completely unproductive until you stop (and then you remain unproductive for a couple of months after that). Maybe Action X is dull, and performing it long term makes you genuinely depressed (and again, unproductive). Maybe it's engaging, but makes you question your morals and leads you to a moral crisis. This doesn't even scratch the surface of the time-and-motion level optimisations found in the article. Truthfully, I think the best way to be a productive being, if that's your goal, is to listen to your emotional warning signs (sense of meaningless, long-term unhealthy stress, perpetual exhaustion, long stretches of boredom etc.) and change your routines in response. Keep your brain running on "clean fuel" and in good condition!